**** Official Stats and Graphs Analysis Thread ****

[jmillerdls]

Originally Posted by King Spew

I'm thinking you win a ton of little pots, but payoff too many big hands, thus the small ptbb/100 when playing 25NL.

Otherwise, the stats look better than fine. Those stats should actually pwn 25NL, so you must be losing value somewhere....

Yeah, his VPIP and PFR are almost the same as mine, but my winrate is about 10X higher. Clearly that isn't all that is important. My aggression factors by street are much higher, and my WTSD% is a bit lower.

[GrumpyB]

Originally Posted by Futtocked

open to any analysis/flaming... am also looking (though i know its not probable) for micro full ring stake at FTP if interested pm or check out my post in marketplace forum

My advice could be (probably is) absolute bollocks, but I'll chip in anyway!

At NL10 you play 16/12, at NL25 you 13.5/9 ... so you've tightened up.

But if you've tightened up why has your WWSF fallen from 36.7 to 34.3 and your WTSD fallen from 27.9 to 24.1?

Could you be giving NL25 players a little bit too much respect, and give up on hands that you would have played more aggressively at NL10?

Just my $0.02

[CCCP]

What program is this made with, is this PT3? I would love to see my stats with this!

Originally Posted by warrantofice

-

[jinmoon]

Originally Posted by jmillerdls

I'd be interested in hearing what people think the max winrate is when 24-tabling...seems like there would be so many profitable spots that would be just about impossible to notice when playing that many. I know when I play more than 18 my winrate takes a hit for sure...purely from missing pots that could be easily taken down.

I think 24 tabling at micro stakes will cause you to stay at micro stakes forever. Its hard to get better when you're playing that many tables. If I were you I'd drop it down to 8-12 tables and make sure that every time you make a decision its well thought through.

I think something that helps a lot with that is instead of only reading posts, responding to them with well thought out lines. Even if its a simple decision to you writing it out trains your brain as opposed to saying, "Raise, LDO". I think doing this coincided with a huge jump in my game. Once your brain is trained to think through each decision more carefully you should slowly add more tables. If you ever feel yourself slipping and going to autopilot, just cut back tables again.

That being said, there are people who 24 table a mix of 400NL-1000NL for winrates of +4ptbb/100. However, these people are the definitely the exception to the rule as they are pretty sick poker players.

[I RENE I]

thx, its useful

[jbrown8777]

Anyone tell me why I'm losing so much without sd? I know i have alot of leaks maybe you guys can point some out. I got PT 3 around hand 18500 and I've been working on not giving up on the flop quite so much since then.

[GrumpyB]

Originally Posted by jbrown8777

Anyone tell me why I'm losing so much without sd? I know i have alot of leaks maybe you guys can point some out. I got PT 3 around hand 18500 and I've been working on not giving up on the flop quite so much since then.

I think people worry way too much about these graphs. The important point is you're winning.

I read something that Doyle Brunson once wrote (and silly me, I didn't save it so I have never been able to find it again) along the lines that he will call all-ins, even when he knows he is behind (and as long as he has some outs) because that is the price that he has to pay to make his aggressive style profitable. People know that if they tangle with him they are playing for stacks. So people fold to most of his aggressive bets before showdown.

Thus, if we could see Doyle Brunson's EV chart I'd expect to see a negative 'won on showdown' but a great 'total won'.

So what will a set-mining chart look like? Well (roughly speaking) seven or eight times out of nine you'll put money in the pot but drop out if you miss and your c-bet doesn't work. There's no showdown and you've lost money. But when you do hit, you want to play for stacks and get that sucker to showdown!

So for a set miner I'd expect to see a negative 'won without showdown' but a great 'total won'.

The point I am trying to make is, there is no rule that says that both the 'won on showdown' and the 'won without showdown' lines must be postive, otherwise you suck and have a massive leak.

You're making money. Be happy. Don't screw up your game just to get a pretty graph.

[CCCP]

Originally Posted by GrumpyB

I read something that Doyle Brunson once wrote (and silly me, I didn't save it so I have never been able to find it again) along the lines that he will call all-ins, even when he knows he is behind (and as long as he has some outs) because that is the price that he has to pay to make his aggressive style profitable. People know that if they tangle with him they are playing for stacks. So people fold to most of his aggressive bets before showdown.

I think he says that in Super System.

[Robin Hood]

What is considered a decent BB won per hand from the SB and BB? I'm at (0.18) from the BB and (0.12) from the SB and wondered how that compared to others.

[alexruimy]

I read the thread on reading and analyzing poker tracker stats but I'm still having a hard time converting the numbers into what I need to change in my play. I'm aware the sample size given is quite small but I'd like to know sooner than later lol. Can anyone help plz?

[alexruimy]

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...d.php?t=158015

just found that. sorry.

[Bacon]

Hand tally = <500.

[yz10andy]

Question about what a couple of stats mean about my game. Small sample size, but still open for discussion. My WSD is 21 and my W$SD is 64. My river AF is 4.7, but flop and turn are 3 and 2.1. I know the W$SD is high, but I went on a sick heater on a new database. It's normally like 55-ish.

Question is what in the heck does all of this mean put together? I don't showdown enough and am only betting my big hands on the river?

Or standard sample size/play more hands and check in later?

[mpethybridge]

Originally Posted by Robin Hood

What is considered a decent BB won per hand from the SB and BB? I'm at (0.18) from the BB and (0.12) from the SB and wondered how that compared to others.

I don't know if this is considered good, decent or bad, but I am thrilled when I am winning back half my blind money. I seem to hover around winning back 50% of my money in the sb and about 66% in the bb through 400,000 hands

edit: this puts your stats right around where mine are, but a bit better; I am at (.19) in BB and (.15) in the sb.

[Gobias Ind.]

FTP NL50 2007 PTracker



Stars NL50 2007 Ptracker





Just from looking at these two graphs, can anyone:

1)Spot major differences in play on one site vs. the other?

2)Spot any major/minor leaks that I'm clearly not picking up?


thanks,
John (Gobias)